Attendance question

[Frank55]

When I run a historic league I've noticed that ballparks
are all at 45000 seats.
Should I keep it at that or raise it? If I don't what will be the downside?

Thanks.

[Dud_Selig]

Originally posted by Frank55
When I run a historic league I've noticed that ballparks
are all at 45000 seats.
Should I keep it at that or raise it? If I don't what will be the downside?

Thanks.

I guess that would depend on what era you're attempting to simulate, and how accurately you want the attendance figures to reflect that era.

If you're simming the year 1900, for example, 45,000 stadia are assuredly inaccurate. Most ballparks of that era seated only a few thousand.

However, if you not really looking for accuracy, there are advantages in keeping the seating capacities as-is, or even increasing them. More seats = higher attendance, which means more revenue to work with, & all the good things that come with that, etc.

So I guess the short answer (which I didn't provide ) is that there isn't a downside to having larger ballparks. After all, OOTP doesn't require that we pay for stadium maintenance, so having a larger stadium will cost you as much as having a smaller one will....nothing!

[Malleus Dei]

Gotta love the short answer.

[Le Grande Orange]

Yup, until such time as OOTP includes an "League Average Attendance" setting the League Totals, attendances in the game will look like modern day ones.

Considering that the MLB average attendance in 2004 was twice that of 1950, and more than 8 times that of 1901, the attendance values generated in OOTP are not accurate for anything other than the current era.

After schedules and doubleheaders, getting accurate attendance values for historical years via a league average attendance value in the League Totals is my next crusade. Not only will it make them look realistic, it should help considerably in achieving era-appropriate salaries as well (in conjunction with other fianancial system changes of course).